Some Interesting bin Laden Stories I Found Today

Something the Dog Said wrote: Actually it simply is not true that the information leading to the death of Bin Laden came from questionable interrogation tactics. The information was deduced from information developed by normal interrogation procedure.

I don't think you can say that with certainty at this point. And we may never know for sure.

I've read what Rumsfeld said. He said no water boarding was done at Gitmo. But other stories say that KSM was first interrogated in eastern Europe and the info about the courier was obtained there. I've thought the whole point of the eastern Europe interrogations was to use "enhanced" techniques.

Previous reports have said that just 3 people were ever water boarded, and one was KSM. It was said he was not talking prior to that. Perhaps the water boarding got him talking, and later he gave info under normal questioning? If so, I'd say the water boarding was still responsible.

Anyway, I'm speculating. My main point is there are still conflicting stories out there and I don't see how you can conclude one way or the other if water boading let to the info about the courier. The reports are changing daily.

PrintSmith wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote: Actually it simply is not true that the information leading to the death of Bin Laden came from questionable interrogation tactics. The information was deduced from information developed by normal interrogation procedure.

Simply not true if you take the word of one person over that of another and suspend all attempts at reason. We do know that KSM was interrogated using enhanced techiques - and we do know that KSM was one of the sources for the identity of the courier. Will you truly suspend reason and proclaim without reservation that the name of the courier was not part of the intelligence harvested during the enhanced interrogations?

Numerous accounts from those with actual knowledge and reports deny that any "enhanced" techniques were used. No credible account has acknowledged the use of such techniques. Even Donald Rumsfield has stated on the record that such techniques were not used to develop the information. The only claims that such techniques were used come from speculation by right wing anti-Obama types. So yes, based on all credible accounts, I can state that the information was not developed from enhanced techniques, unlike your statement that it was. Perhaps you could provide a source for your "facts" that the information was developed by "enhanced" interrogation techniques?

AspenValley wrote: If all it took was torture to get bin Laden seems to me they should have gotten him a lot sooner.

One would have to have knowledge of the information in order to convey it under any form of interrogation, wouldn't they? If you knew you were being hunted and that a $25 million bounty had been placed on your head, wouldn't you keep your actual whereabouts from other high profile targets? Isn't that how one who is being hunted usually insulates themselves from being found? Many felons on the run are found when they contact people that those hunting for them also know about. KSM knew the identity of the courier, not where the courier delivered the information. If he had known that, then we wouldn't have needed to bother with finding and tracking the courier and hoping that we guessed right when we figured bin Laden was holed up in that compound. That lack of knowledge protected both KSM and bin Laden. If neither knew the actual location of the other, then it is not something that can be extracted from them if they are caught by those hunting them.

That's basic security protocol AV. What I find amazing was that the security protocol wasn't stricter given the stakes. One would think that there would be at least another 2 or 3 layers of insulation between the two. KSM would know the name of the courier that he used, that courier would know the name of the next one, that one the next one and be the one who ultimately delivered the information to bin Laden. If you are going to the extreme of living somewhere with no internet, no phones, no electronic fingerprints at all, you would also think that the entire communication network would remain unknown to the two principles for their own protection as well.

Something the Dog Said wrote: [Numerous accounts from those with actual knowledge and reports deny that any "enhanced" techniques were used. No credible account has acknowledged the use of such techniques. Even Donald Rumsfield has stated on the record that such techniques were not used to develop the information. The only claims that such techniques were used come from speculation by right wing anti-Obama types. So yes, based on all credible accounts, I can state that the information was not developed from enhanced techniques, unlike your statement that it was. Perhaps you could provide a source for your "facts" that the information was developed by "enhanced" interrogation techniques?

Former President George W. Bush says if he had it to do over, he would still waterboard the self-professed mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.

Waterboarding is a simulated drowning technique that the Obama administration considers torture. Bush acknowledged Wednesday that the U.S. used the harsh interrogation technique on Khalid Sheik Mohammed and said he would "do it again to save lives."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/06/03/politics/main6543673.shtml

The 2005 memo also says that the C.I.A. used waterboarding 183 times in March 2003 against Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the self-described planner of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/20/world/20detain.html

Something the Dog Said wrote: Numerous accounts from those with actual knowledge and reports deny that any "enhanced" techniques were used. No credible account has acknowledged the use of such techniques. Even Donald Rumsfield has stated on the record that such techniques were not used to develop the information. The only claims that such techniques were used come from speculation by right wing anti-Obama types. So yes, based on all credible accounts, I can state that the information was not developed from enhanced techniques, unlike your statement that it was. Perhaps you could provide a source for your "facts" that the information was developed by "enhanced" interrogation techniques?

Really now - KSM was never waterboarded according to credible sources? The use of enhanced interrogation techniques earlier in his captivity may not have enticed him to answer other questions before being subjected to those techniques again? Reason will not support what you are saying Dog. Partisan blinders will, but not reason.

How about this. If waterboarding was used and directly or indirectly revealed the information that made this raid possible, then it was worth it in this extreme case. It should only be used if directly approved by the President and answered for by the President.

I think it's reasonable to conclude that water boarding got KSM talking back when he was under CIA control (before going to Gitmo, probably in eastern Europe).

Once they got done with him, he continued to talk under normal interrogation in Gitmo.

At this point, I'm not sure where they got the name of the courier. Some stories say eastern Europe, others say Gitmo.

I want to join the CIA! Those guys rock!

PrintSmith wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote: Numerous accounts from those with actual knowledge and reports deny that any "enhanced" techniques were used. No credible account has acknowledged the use of such techniques. Even Donald Rumsfield has stated on the record that such techniques were not used to develop the information. The only claims that such techniques were used come from speculation by right wing anti-Obama types. So yes, based on all credible accounts, I can state that the information was not developed from enhanced techniques, unlike your statement that it was. Perhaps you could provide a source for your "facts" that the information was developed by "enhanced" interrogation techniques?

Really now - KSM was never waterboarded according to credible sources? The use of enhanced interrogation techniques earlier in his captivity may not have enticed him to answer other questions before being subjected to those techniques again? Reason will not support what you are saying Dog. Partisan blinders will, but not reason.

Resorting to distortion of my post? KSM was waterboarded but did not give up the name of the courier despite the torture. You have absolutely nothing but far right wing speculation to back up your assertions. If you actually bothered to inform yourself of the facts, you would be able to discuss this intelligently rather than using distortions and speculation.

And we know for certain that he wasn't threatened with those enhanced techniques during the interrogations which yielded the information, right Dog? We KNOW that, with 100% certainty? We know that those enhanced techniques didn't soften him up and make regular techniques more productive? You are that certain of the psychology of this man that you would go out on that thin limb? Reason tells us something quite different than that Dog. Reason tells us that a state of hopelessness results in productive interrogations. Reason tells us that having yielded other information while subjected to enhanced interrogations, a state of hopelessness is well within the realm of possibility. Having once betrayed, regardless of reason, additional betrayals are more easily obtained than the first one was.

To state as fact that the enhanced interrogations played no role in the development of the information simply is not sustainable under any application of reasoned thought. KSM didn't simply wake up one morning and decide to tell us what he knew that wasn't told while he was being interrogated before. KSM didn't wake up and see the evil of his deeds and seek redemption for them by spilling all he knew. What he endured before figured into each and every subsequent interrogation he underwent. Reason alone tells us this.